Speaking

Email

Obama: Paying More Taxes is “Patriotic”

President Obama today said it was “patriotic” of “well-to-do Americans” to pay higher taxes.

Obama, who spoke at the White House, indicated the money would be used not just for paying down the deficit, but for broad new spending plans, which he termed “investments” in “things like” education:

Instead of the middle class paying more, we should ask the wealthiest Americans to pay a little more, a modest amount, so that we can reduce our deficit and still make investments in things like education that help our economy grow . . . And here’s the thing — there are a lot of well-to-do Americans, patriotic Americans, who understand this and are willing to do the right thing, willing to do their part to make this country strong.

Obama made the remarks during a short speech in which he called on Congress not to extend the Bush tax cuts for higher earners. A video of the appearance is below.

Paying more income taxes and having your money spent by the government is not normally associated with patriotism. Actually, Americans managed to show their patriotism without hardly paying income taxes at all until 1894, when the first permanent income tax was enacted.

Some people have another term for individuals who want to pay more taxes to a government that currently is spending at the highest share of GDP since World War II: Suckers.

Could not agree more. What fool would pay more in taxes so that the socialist idiot in the WH can stuff his friends pockets, give out more entitlements, refuse to enforce laws on the books that they don’t like, sue states that try to clean-up their voter lists or try to enforce laws the feds wiill not. And then there are the unions he grovels to. I’d get more satisfaction flushing the money down the toilet.

– the rich already pay higher taxes
– we all know your “investments” are really a wealth transfer from the “top 10%” to YOUR FRIENDS – this doesn’t go to the poor, this tax money is funneled to your campaign contributors
– everyone knows that your “tax on the wealthy” won’t do anything to the debt or the deficit (well, except your base of fools) and that even your argument of FAIRNESS rings hollow (see point above)

. It’s statements like this that give us the impression that he isn’t really an “American”, that he doesn’t share our understanding of how things work.

MrO must not be aware that every property owner in America already “invests” in the eduction of our youth. He wants us to believe that “well-to-do” people want to pay more in taxes but are somehow being prevented from doing their “patriotic” duty by the evil forces in Congress.

“He wants us to believe that “well-to-do” people want to pay more in taxes but are somehow being prevented from doing their “patriotic” duty by the evil forces in Congress.”

So true. I get a kick out of guys like Buffet who trumpet about how they should be paying more… If you want to pay more, write the government a check! You’d think that’s not an option the way people go on and on about this.

I think its odd that every American, regardless of level of income, strives to pay the least amount of tax possible and yet Obama is trying to convince the lemmings that it’s a bad thing when the wealthy do it. Makes no sense.

What will it take for people to realize it’s not a problem with too little taxation. The problem is totally related to spending.

Part of the problem is that the lemmings of this country don’t understand the concept of investments and capital gains. These income sources are taxed at a lower rate (I understand; I’m no tax scholar) because they are riskier. The lower rate creates an incentive for people to try to earn their money from selling a product or investing in the stock market. If a shockingly rich person pays a shockingly low tax rate, odds are he took a huge risk and it paid off.

It’s such a shame how financially illiterate this country is. I work really hard to teach my kids that debt is bad. It’s really hard when they see all their friends going on vacation when we can’t, or buying new cars. Now that my oldest is working his first job he understands how much of his pay comes out in taxes and he’s not having any federal withheld. And then we have the leaders of the country telling us they need to spend more to get us out of debt? Sigh.

Oh, and I guess they think all of the seniors who are living off their investments are unpatriotic also? They’d only be paying the capital gains rate, if they pay anything at all.

Keith, think of it the opposite way…
If you are patriotic for paying more taxes, then you must be unpatriotic for wanting pay less taxes or NO taxes.
Therefore anyone in the middle class who is for taxcuts, and anyone in the middle class or lower class who wants money or wants to pay no taxes is unpatriotic.

Did he just call poor people, people on welfare or unemployment unpatriotic??

Do you not long for the days when Presidents spoke in gramatically correct sentences and were truly eloquent? No “woud of”. No “things like education.” No “stuff” for the president to do. No “folks” addressed. Do you long for the days when Presidents spoke to “my fellow Amerians”? Do you long for the days of Kennedy and Reagan. Hell, even FDR (in terms of grammar). (Do you think our current President even knows what infamy is?)

Do the Presidents of Harvard and Columbia long for the days when their graduates in the public eye spoke in gramatically correct sentences that communicated specific ideas? As a person with two degrees from the latter institution, I certainly hope they do.

he doesn’t want to loose the ‘lection or nothing because he neds us ‘folks’ who are lucky enuf to make thingamajigs (which we should be down on our neez thankin’ theh creator for-as we understan him that is) can keep working and payin’ taxes

I’m reminded of the interview of Will Smith (FResh Prince BelAire) on French television when he made a “we rich should pay more” sobriquet and the oh so very French hosts informed him that the rate among the frogs was 75%. He then reacts like someone who’s just been told the beautiful woman he just made out w/ -was a man.

How can Michelle Obama afford all of the expensive clothing she wears? Is she receiving some if it gratis or at reduced prices? I recall an article quoting one of her favorite designers who said he sometimes just mails things to her staff. That meant to me she did not order it and so should not pay for it. When Nancy Reegan received clothing at reduced prices the media was besides themselves with claims she was benefitting from her husband’s office.

If she is not receiving any favors and Mrs. Obama realizes the additional taxes her husband wants the two of them to pay will affect her clothing budget, maybe she will not vote for him.

I doubt before Michelle took up residence in the WH she had probably
never heard of a $3000 Alaia belt or a $3000+ L Wren Scott mimime
cardigan. I think she must obviously look at the price tag before she
wonders ‘does this look good on me?’. We will never know who pays
for that monstrosity of a wardrobe but I doubt Barry gets his checkbook
out. There are rules about these things but we know rules mean
nothing to the Obama’s!

So, if these articles were sent as gifts, aren’t they subject to federal law about such things – ie, they belong to the office, not her or POTUS? If she intends to treat them as private, has she declared them to the IRS as income? Since they’re all quite valuable. Too, she and the One are worth quite a lot, so she could pay for them from the joint account…doubt it tho, too many folks trying to curry favor and have their wonderful threads appear in public and the little people ought to show her proper appreciation for her wonderful efforts to , uh…..

So, how much did Palins outfits cost the Campaign office – the ones that garnered such disdain from the media?

Must read article from the other day Obama’s Calculated Deception. Obama depends on the voters being – basically -ignorant so he can lie and deceive about tax rates, etc. Not only are we not supposed to understand the historical precedent of previous “recoveries”, we’re also supposed to fall for that “the rich don’t pay their fare share” bs.

And, sadly, it working. It’s one thing if libs understood, and simply agreed they should pay more. But they really have NO CLUE.

No to lecture you folks, but this I will quote:

Yet, in that same year, the middle 20% of income earners, the true middle class, paid 2.7% of total federal individual income taxes on net, while earning 15% of before-tax income. And the bottom 40% of income earners, instead of paying some income taxes to support the federal government, were paid by the IRS cash equal to 10% of federal individual income taxes on net.

That means altogether the bottom 60% of income earners, which includes the middle class, paid less than 0% of total federal individual income taxes as a group on net. Instead, as a group, they received net cash payments from the IRS on net.

You are assuming (1) people can read, (2) people understand basic math, (3) low income people and the middle class want to pay more taxes but since the federal tax code allows them credits and deductions they just can’t do it, and (4) people actually care that the taxes someone pays are used to pad the pockets of politicians, their friends and family members, and campaign donors and fundraisers.

I have said this before and I will say it again: Wealthy Americans that feel they should pay more taxes CAN PAY THE US TREASURY DIRECTLY for “deficit reduction”. We do not need any statutes changed. Just make out a check Mr & Mrs Liberal. That satisfies your moral obligation and its even tax deducible. Make YOUR President proud and leave ME the hell alone!

Another option is they can join the Giving Pledge Organization and give away over half of their wealth to philanthropy. The good thing about it is they can decide on how the money is spent.

I took a look at the Giving Pledge website to see the list of people who have agreed. I do not see the Hollywood crowd joining it.

There is a story that in 2000 when Obama attended the Democratic Convention in Los Angeles he was maxed out on his credit card and could not afford a ticket to get into the convention hall. He had to watch the proceedings on a big screen in a parking lot. I have read reports he is now worth in the $15 million range. I don’t see his name on the list.

What in God’s name was that all about??? This guy is barely coherent without his TOTUS! In an open forum, he would have been booed off the stage. The mask is off – we need to demand to see his academic records before he spends another day in the WH!

Good,Keith, you unveil him again . The wealthiest should pay ” a little more, a modest amount” to reduce the deficit and make needed investments !!!????. The facts about the US economy has not reached his bubble yet ? Many countries in Europe totters in front of the abyss and the US will not be spared. There is an eerie feeling about the upcoming autumn. Good heavens, this fool must be removed before he turns the US into a Greece.

The earliest federally legislated direct American tax was through the Revenue Act of 1861. State wise, there have been at least a dozen earlier than this.

But here’s the kicker: Americans have been paying taxes since day one, albeit indirectly, i.e., through the Tariff Act of 1789. At one stage, these tariffs comprised over 80% of the federal budget. It is also one of, if not the main reason, behind the secession of the eleven confederates states and the eventual Civil War.

Further, if we minus the bills from Afghanistan and Iraq, which coincidentally, represents the first time the country did not raise taxes to finance its war/s, the federal government is actually in its healthiest state in over three decades.

Keep deluding yourself about the state of the economy. I’m so sick of the left dragging up the theory that Iraq and Afghanistan were “off the books” until the anointed one came along. That is such a lame excuse for the more than $5 trillion Obama has spent in less than 4 years. Wasn’t it Obama who said Afghanistan is the “good war”? Is that why our soldiers are dying in record numbers in that desert hell hole? Why no mention of Obama’s funding of Muslim Brotherhood takeovers in Egypt, Libya, and soon to be Syria?

The 16th Amendment, ratified February 3rd, 1913, brought all Americans their first real taste of the progressive income tax, and Woodrow Wilson’s creation of the Federal Reserve on December 23rd, 1913 was just the cherry on top. America’s bankruptcy at the hands of progressives (aka statists) has been a hundred years in the making. We are at a crossroads this election. We can choose to follow the demagogue, let our system of government collapse, and live under tyranny; or we can choose the path back to liberty and the restoration of our Constitutional Republic. I choose liberty.

“…the federal government is actually in its healthiest state in over three decades.”

Well, the Federal payroll has been growing with great vigor though they’re paying for it with converted yuan, so I guess one could claim that’s a measure of health. I don’t.

The unemployment is not due to Iraq/Afganistan, any more than it’s due to the other conflicts that actually have no congressional approval – ahem, War Powers Act? Waiting to Dingy to finally muster the appropriate outrage. /chirp /chirp.

Try the economy is tanking due to many factors. Mainly three factors and resultant moral hazards:

CRA of 1977.
Clinton’s efforts to put teeth in the CRA in 1994 telling banks to play ball or suffer. They folded and sucked up hard, *forcing* lenders to offer mortgages to sub-prime borrowers. Guess who came unable to meet their mortgages in droves?
Law passed allowing the securitization of mortgages. *cough*Goldman-Saks*cough*

Oh, BTW, Dodd-Frank does the same damn thing – *forcing* lenders to offer mortgages to sub-prime borrowers. Meet the quota or else. Pull your head out dude.

TAX FACTS: The top 1% of wage earners provide 37% of ALL tax revenues collected. The top 10% of wage earners provide 68% of ALL tax revenues collected. Thus, it would appear – to me – that wealthy Americans are already paying their ‘fair share’ of taxes.

Now, let’s look to where the REAL problem is – spending:
America’s debt stand at $16 TRILLION. Obama railed on Bush for adding $4 TRILLION to the debt in 8 years, while he himself has added over $5 TRILLION in less than half the time! Deficit spending has TRIPLED since Obama took office, to $1.2 – $1.7 TRILLION annually (nevermind Obama promised to cut the deficit in half by the end of his first term). The government is spending $11 BILLION each and every day. We borrow 40 cents of every dollar we spend. Social programs suck-up 40% of our budget, and it’s growing. Note that Obama Care has yet to officially kick in, so we have yet to realize what the CBO says will be over $2 TRILLION more in cost, than what we were first told about when the bill was rammed through Congress. Beginning to get the idea?

These numbers are NOT fiction. The president is aware of all this, too. His reaction? Let’s NOT cut spending; instead, let’s raise taxes on people who already pay the largest percentage of income taxes – many of whom are small business owners, and help produce jobs and drive our economy – and “invest” (spend) even more than we are now!

As nice as it may sound to consider “investing” more in things like education – and this kind of rhetoric appeals to many voters, especially those who are no educated as to our current spending issues – isn’t it crazy to avoid obviously needed cuts in spending, and up the ante by proposing MORE spending, AND collecting more in taxes to help pay for it?

Note that Obama’s proposed tax increase on the wealthy would only bring in an extra $40 – $85 BILLION a year. If we are spending $11 BILLION a day, how much will this small, additional revenue, help pay down TRILLIONS in debt and deficit spending? Do the math: the additional revenues raised would be spent in 4 – 8 DAYS!!!

You think THAT is something? Check out these figures: it is estimated that if the government was to tax ALL Americans and corporations at 100% of their earnings for a year, and additionally seize and liquidate all their assets, giving the government the resulting monies as tax revenues, the monies raised would only pay for a few months worth of spending, at current levels! That’s right! $11 BILLION in spending each day is A LOT of money!

Here is what I say to Obama: you maintain that paying more taxes is patriotic. I maintain that proposing higher taxes, to cover MORE proposed spending, is UNPATRIOTIC! We are already in a hole, and you are digging us in further.

Every time I hear him say this and then refer to himself as “one of those people” (who should pay more) I say “Hey go ahead, Barack…pay more taxes if you want to and tell all your fellow beggars for other people’s money that they, too, have the right to send in all the $$$$ they want…could be the solution to our debt crisis! There is no law saying you CAN’T pay more taxes…feel free! I’m sick of your poor me attitude..all your responsibilities….oh boo hoo. Look, you didn’t HAVE to run for president, so quit whining and complaining about how hard your job is.”

Maybe he could get “Longface John” Kerry to take some of the ole lady’s millions out of tax free municipals and pay some tax on the dough. After all, Longface did run for president on the democrat ticket. Set a good example, “Liveshot”. And, BTW, perhaps he could move his SEVEN MILLION DOLLAR megayacht out of the TAX Haven he has it parked in. “Lovie, they JUST can’t care for TEAK properly in Massachusetts shipyards.”

Just take all of the millions and billions of dollars from the rich democrats and pay off the national debt. That would take care of the debt. After all, it is the democrats hell bent and determined to tax the people more and more.

[…] mythical sound bite from the successful needing to “pay their fair share” to the successful needing to be “patriotic” and “do the right thing” by paying more taxes.” Whether he’s talking about fairness or […]

[…] In 2008 we were told that a government spending far more than it was taking in was unpatriotic. Now, if you don’t want your taxes to go up to cover a government spending far more than it’s taking in, you’re unpatriotic. […]

[…] In 2008 we were told that a government spending far more than it was taking in was unpatriotic. Now, if you don’t want your taxes to go up to cover a government spending far more than it’s taking in, you’re unpatriotic. […]

[…] go up to cover a government spending far more than it’s taking in, you’re unpatriotic. https://www.whitehousedossier.com/201…xes-patriotic/ Carney’s statement is predicated on the ridiculous notion that reduced government spending […]

[…] Originally Posted by Boghie I have guaranteed that I will be unaffected. Just moved all of my 'G Fund' assets out. Also, I have just made the final change to zero out Kalefornea's tax increase. Since I am not a member of the 1% all I had to do was estimate the sales tax and property 'tax' increase and negate those. Governor Brown is counting on my $150, he ain't going to get it. Go Broke Kalefornia. Go Broke… And, Timmy, hope you ain't borrowing on my 'G Fund' money. It ain't there anymore You are so Unpatriotic!!! Obama: Paying More Taxes is “Patriotic” | The Blog on Obama: White House Dossier […]

[…] In 2008 we were told that a government spending far more than it was taking in was unpatriotic. Now, if you don’t want your taxes to go up to cover a government spending far more than it’s taking in, you’re unpatriotic. […]